zeldafandomcom-20200223-history
Forum:Beta Articles
So this is one of those things I've mulled over since I first moseyed on over here. And I've been browsing Unseen64 today, and found out a lot of interesting beta things, which has brought this back to mind. On Bulbapedia, they have special beta articles for every generation of games (EG: Red/Blue/Yellow beta article, Gold/Silver/Crystal beta article) listing all the beta information, like, in the case of G/S/C, beta pokemon, beta areas, unreleased items and other such things. I found these articles really interesting, and I'd love to know more about beta Zelda, but the information we DO have is scattered around the wiki. You can find an example of the Bulbapedia articles here: Main page for the articles G/S/C beta article So I propose we take a leaf from Bulbapedia's book and have beta articles like this. OoT, for example, has so many beta things, not just to do with Ura Zelda, that we simply don't have any information on. I've found out some really interesting things today on beta Zelda games and it seems such a shame we don't document enough of it. Or at the very least, a dedicated beta section on each of the games' pages, but with some games having so much stuff, I think that would be too cluttered. Thanks for your time, Stars talk http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y27/pyroac/Starssprite.gif 14:13, June 27, 2010 (UTC) I can see arguments for and against. I just don't know the stuff, so unless we give it a try, we'll never know. I think it's worth at least trying out. --Naxios10 (talk) 14:32, June 27, 2010 (UTC) I agree with it, let's do it. I think detailed beta articles on each game couldn't hurt anything, and I really would love to help make the pages/help with info. So yeah. Whee! -'Minish Link' 16:42, June 27, 2010 (UTC) :Maybe with a few changes, it might work. Not a big fan of galleries quashed into the main article like that, though. --AuronKaizer ''' 16:47, June 27, 2010 (UTC) ::Ehh....... I really don't see the need for it, but I suppose we could give it a shot.-- C2' / 16:50, June 27, 2010 (UTC) :::If done correctly I don't see a problem with it. But the key is doing it correctly, which I wouldn't even know how to make it look good. But that's just me. I'm sure somebody can figure a way to make it look nice. --Birdman5589 (talk) 05:12, June 28, 2010 (UTC) Recently I've come to think that there may be a potential for good, interesting, and informative articles based on beta material hidden in a game's coding, by making either a series-wide page of beta information, or game-specific ones, similar to game secrets and glitches pages. Widening the scope, within reason, is always a good thing regardless. Also, some beta subjects have their own articles right now, so where does the line go for what does deserve its own article? --Auron'Kaizer ' 23:33, November 20, 2010 (UTC) Bringing this back from the dead. I think that the largest beta things - for example, Unicorn Fountain - deserve their own article ''if there is enough information. If we only have a few lines on something like a beta item, it can just be put on a beta page for a game. Aria springs to mind - a fan-named young woman who appears in many screenshots of Zelda 64 and was recently restored in one beta project. However, for most beta things, the information on them is as broken as the thing itself, and most content doesn't warrant its own article. To simplify: If the beta item/person/location/cheese is large/important enough and has enough information about it for at least a paragraph, then an article should be made. -Stars talk http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y27/pyroac/Starssprite.gif 20:48, January 20, 2011 (UTC) :HELPING bring this back from the dead. Please see this article of my sandbox, which is a "test article" of sorts for this concept. What do you be thinking? -'Minish Link' 20:04, January 23, 2011 (UTC) ::I like the idea of continuing to include beta information, and the idea of organizing it and sequestering it somehow. This hasn't been brought up yet as far as I know, but I think Beta tags (like non-canon and theory tags) would be useful. I think it's strange for example, to have a Minish Cap section for the Fire Rod, as that makes it look like it appears in the game (if you actually read the description, it says it doesn't appear, but it still has a normal heading on the Fire Rod page). Beta Tags like this would prevent confusion for people who don't read the whole article, similarly to how theory and non-canon sections, which are under clear disclaimers, can freely explain things without alluding to their noncanonical-ness in every sentence. Back on the topic of a Beta Article for each game, I think it would be really cool to have it all in one place like that, and I think it'd be much better for them to have their own pages than tack them on to the game's main page. I'm a little concerned given the troubles other every-____-in-this-game-in-one-article pages have given us, but these would hopefully end up better. I like the separate Enemies/Items/Locations headings, and think we could also include a Quote section for text not found in-game (though there's obviously some degree of difficulty in identifying a lot of that). I also think the introduction of beta pages should clearly explain what we mean by "beta". Whether something has it's own article is just a case by case judgment call on if it's popular/well known enough and has enough information to say about it. If there is a beta article for each game, we should still mention and link to things with their own separate beta articles (obviously). --[[User:Fierce Deku|'Fierce']][[User talk:Fierce Deku|'Deku']] 06:00, January 24, 2011 (UTC) :::Sounds good. -'Minish Link' 14:27, January 25, 2011 (UTC) I actually like the idea of including beta information. —'Triforce' 14 22:40, May 12, 2011 (UTC) :I really do think we should implement this; did you see my sandbox, Triforce? -'Minish Link' 23:57, May 12, 2011 (UTC) Closure This isn't going to get anywhere at all, removing from the list. – EnemyPeacemaker 20:17, March 2, 2013 (UTC)